Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Arvind Singh v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT TAX No. 1629 of 2005 [2005] RD-AH 6954 (6 December 2005)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.10.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.1629 of 2005.

Arvind Singh Versus The state of U.P. and others.


Hon'ble A.K.Yog, J.

Hon'ble Prakash Krishna, J.

Heard  Sri Aloke Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Learned  Standing Counsel Sri M. R. Jaiswal for the Department.

The petitioner is carrying on the business of vending country Liquor at Rani Ganj situated at Dalpatpur,  District Ballia. The license for the year 2005-06 has been granted to him. It appears on November 24, 2005 the Respondent No.2 issued a notice cancelling the license of the shop of the petitioner on the ground that he has failed to deposit the arrears of license fee. Copy of the said notice has been annexed as Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition.  Challenging the aforesaid order/notice the present Writ Petition has been filed.

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is some dispute about the quantum of the payment of license fee.  But he expressed his willingness to deposit the entire sum so demanded under the notice Dated November 24, 2005 within a period of six weeks from today in three equal instalments of 15 days each.  

Learned Standing counsel submitted that if the amount is  deposited by the petitioner the Department would have no objection.  with the continuance of the license of the petitioner, as the Department is interested only in revenue.  In view of these facts we direct the petitioner to deposit the sum amounting to Rs.14,22,585.62  (under the notice dated November 24, 2005) in three equal instalments of 15 days each within a period of six weeks.  The petitioner also undertakes to deposit the license fee for the subsequent months as and when it becomes due.  In case of failure of the petitioner to deposit the aforesaid sum within the aforesaid period, it will be open to the Collector, Ballia/Respondent No.2 to proceed further in the matter.  For a period of six weeks, the Respondent No.2/Collector, Ballia is directed not to settle the sub shop of the petitioner, in any manner, with  third person.  

It is made clear that, if any other amount has been deposited by the petitioner it shall also be adjusted while making the deposit.

With the aforesaid direction Writ Petition is disposed of finally.

Dated 6-12-2005



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.